Putting Spaghetti back in the Holidays

Published December 19th, 2011 by Bobby Henderson

I posted my husband and I’s tree topper on my Facebook account. To my surprise, a devout and particularly humorless Christian liked it. Clearly, His Noodly Appendage touches those who don’t even seek it. May we all receive a generous helping of His slow cooked grace this ChriFSMas season.

149 Responses to “Putting Spaghetti back in the Holidays”

Just to let you know, there was an incident involving an australian canning company that made off with Gandhi as their logo. This prompted many hindus to protest against the overt casual use of their country’s founding father. I’ve read what Casey Luskin from Discovery Institute reported that your imagery contained symbols, slogans intended to mock and vilify Christianity. I’d say your group are no different than the Romans who scratched graffiti on the walls portraying a christian named alexamenos worshipping a crucified donkey and thew Xtians to the lions just to prove who’s boss. Why are you guys being insensitivity to people’s feelings? There are those who view Jesus the same way the Hindu’s view Gandhi. Both personages are historical. Both died horrible deaths in defiance of a culture that’s imperialistic. I know you guys respect activists who died bringing democracies in dictatorships as well as scientists who refuse to back down against what they know is true, Can you extend that respect and courtesy to the people who die for the gospel? I’m talking about Christian missionaries who were killed by communists or Islamists.

The so-called “Discovery institute” is a mouthpiece for creationism (tarted up and now called “intelligent design”) so I’m not surprised at Casey Luskin’s comments. Gandhi is historical: I know he existed as my parents were around at that time and spoke to me about him but I have yet to see any convincing evidence for the existence of Jesus, especially the one portrayed in the New Testament. You could do worse than start off with this site, although there are plenty of sites on the internet that question the existence of such a person. http://nobeliefs.com/exist.htm

Dear Alvin – I’m not even going to touch your comparison of Jesus to Gandhi as a historical figure and activist, but I will say this in regards to your claim that this site is insensitive: I spent 18 years as a devout Christian and have experienced religious insensitivity on many occasions. There is nothing about Pastafarianism that is anti-Christian, in fact I think it is quite possible to be both a Christian and a Pastafarian. This website is devoted to promoting free thought and protecting the separation of church and state, among other things. It merely states that there is not enough scientific evidence behind Christianity to justify its beliefs being taught to children as scientific theory, an idea that I stood behind even as a believer of Intelligent Design.

More importantly, as an ex-Christian, I have experienced FAR more insensitivity from Christians who exhibit absolutely no respect for a persons lack of faith. (I realize many do, I’m simply saying that in my experience, religious folk are less sensitive to a person’s right to freedom of/from religion than non-religious people.)

Putting a Flying Spaghetti Monster on top of my tree isn’t showing disrespect for “Christian missionaries who were killed by communists or Islamists,” I can’t find a logical connection between those two ideas. You are aware that Christmas trees are of Pagan origins, correct? There is nothing about Christmas, or Christmas trees, in the Bible. Sleep soundly tonight my dear Alvin, I don’t think Jesus would think twice about any of this.

TIARA HUCKABEE, the Bible does have this to say about Christmas trees:

Jeremiah 10
10:1 Hear ye the word which the LORD speaketh unto you, O house of Israel:
10:2 Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them.
10:3 For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe.
10:4 They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not.

I’m being guilt tripped into attending the family’s church service this morning…I wonder if I have enough time to make that into a t-shirt.

nun sequitursays:

December 25, 2011 at 11:30 AM

Maybe this meant ONE communal tree, for all the masses, not the deforrestation yuletime encourages…(treefarms or not)…ecological conservation was NOT so much a hot issue in those days evidently?

nun sequitursays:

December 27, 2011 at 11:28 AM

if absolutely must attend services, suggest u do what my spouse did @ church camp…granted, he was pre teen, but it involved ‘posession’ & a group attempt 2 rid him of evil spirits…i was not there, this is just on recounting (@ the time he told me this, i was unaware that exorcisms do still occur)- either that or a whoopee cushion could relieve u of further invites, but is disrespectful. an alternative would b the ‘brady bunch’ technique, ,,ever c the episode where marcia envisions her driving instructor in the nude 2 relieve anxiety? that may help. may also b considered disrespectful (to congregation leader), however a more concealed variety. it looks by the date as if i m 2 late 2 offer suggestions anyway…my spouse used 2 fall asleep during services, which he says, prompted family member remark: ‘god talks 2 those whom sleep in church’ the ‘most’ or, some such…i m probably the wrong person 2 b handing out directives, as i employed nothing of said sort & used 2 try listening.

TiltedHorizonsays:

December 25, 2011 at 2:25 AM

Alvin,

So faith healers, bigots, snake oil salesmen and other wackos who (like Casey Luskin and the ‘discovery’ institute nutjobs who have yet to produce anything of substance after 22 years) should be ‘respected’ even though they operate at the fringes of their faith. That is a heaping load of crap.

As for your comparison of FSM to the Romans, no ‘xtians’ have been physically harmed by any CoFSM member or in the name of FSM, I therefore call shenanigans and invoke my right to whack you with a broom.

as some1 having been hospitalized during treatment for depression,,could i request, please, people consider finding some other phrasing besides ‘nut job’, ‘crazy’, etc when describing persons u find unreasonable? we just got a newsletter from a place requesting dobation 4 a worthy cause…within the text was a descriptor term explaining disparate points on a spectrum…the term chosen to tie it all neatly together: ‘schizophrenic’.
A negative connotation was implied. ..not helpful.

& there is no need 2 apologize…i had meant 2 include that i m not a spokesperson for the topic & realize people r generally not categorizing specifically concerning this & have probably been guilty of it myself, but since becoming more aware of how stigma is proliferated, wanted 2 not say nothing…& no offense intended.

it is raining outside, here. my great grandmother once told me that was ‘god’s tears’…maybe it was, but now wonder, could it b drippings from the strainer? i do not have the answers…

theFewtheProudtheMarinarasays:

December 25, 2011 at 8:17 AM

Almost every “Christian” symbol (birth in a manger, star in the East, 3 wise men, crucifix, virgin birth, Xmas tree, etc.) was borrowed from earlier religions. So they don’t have any copyrights. And while Gandhi is historical, please cite any contemporary historical reference to Jesus. There aren’t any, so until one is found, don’t claim he’s historical any more than Robin Hood or King Arthur.

“Can you extend that respect and courtesy to the people who die for the gospel?”
No. Not any more than people who died for their favorite comic strip.
Here’s a question for you, Alvin: How much respect and courtesy do you have for suicide bombers who died for the Koran?

by some definitions, any1 dying defending what they believe in is paramount 2 a suicide mission…if u defend an idea to your dying breath, signing up for war in some circumstances end up suicide missions. god & country both concepts. in saying that, do appreciate our military… & wonder if war will ever b a thing of past.

How can you state the possibility of someone holding Christian beliefs and at the same time joining your organization who’s purpose it is to lampoon christian beliefs as nonsensical? It just invites cognitive dissonance on the adherent and coming from an ex-christian like yourself, Isn’t that a bit hypocritical to say to a Christian “we welcome you”, but at the same time you mock Christianity’s values e.g. Creationism, God behind their backs.

I do understand that you feel justified in lampooning christians, because they’ve persecuted atheists, deists and freethinkers before. But the same can easily be applied to Rationalists in your group who are just as arrogant and scapegoating e.g. Brian Sapient from the Rational Response Squad labelled his grandmother mentally-ill. Here’s a quote from Scott Atran an atheist psychologist from the Edge

“Jeremy Ginges, a psychologist at the New School, finds that belief in God does not promote violence, combative martyrdom or almost anything else the “God delusion” was blamed for at the conference. University of British Columbia psychologists Ara Norenzayan and Ian Hansen have recently shown, for some 10,000 subjects surveyed in several countries and continents, that although believing “my God is the only God” increases the odds of scapegoating by 32%, simply believing “there is a God” decreases the tendency to blame others for one’s troubles by 45%. These researchers also show that atheists with exclusivist beliefs are just as likely to scapegoat others as Christians, Jews or Muslims.”

And seriously I wasn’t talking about Christmas or the Holidays, I don’t care for it really (Deist you know) Yule logs, Saturnalia the whole business, i’m indifferent about it all. But its interesting to note that the non-believing have adapted the same tactic used by Christian overlords in a triumphalist gesture of co-opting a previous festive day for another. Roman Saturnalia was transformed to Christianity which then in turn got transformed into Commercial, Non-denominational, Family and Friends Holiday. I think I see a bit of hitler-stache growing on some atheists…

The therapist i was seeing for his offered specialt, hypnosis for chronic pain, (also depression), asked me, unexpectedly,to answer a question i thought was @ 1st hypothetical…then after he insisted, i gave 1 of several possible answers. ..2 his question on the afterlife. He got up out of his seat & scolded me for my response…then the head games started…reported 2 admin, finally fearing othrs would need 2 endure this..a sign @ 1 point had then gone up, stating care @ facility, a catholic run hospital complete with attached prayer wing ,,all care, is delivered thru god, in so many words & on waiting message on phone, gods love message.
that SAME therapist only left (2 practice elsewhere) after he approved unsupervised visitation for a man stalking his estranged ex & their toddler…the man stabbed to death his toddler on said unsupervised visit, then arranged her body in a shrine with all her stuffed animals…the papers said the man had just converted to christianity, was in the proccess of converting from islamic faith. a family member of ours worked for coroners office @ time & confirmed what had been released. that therapist, i venture 2 say more concerned with a persons RELIGIOUS CONVICTIONS over humanity, coming from me. I was LEAST surprised he was the therapist that cleared the guy for visitation.
He left very hush & went over to lutheran services to ‘practice’ after that…

since starting to post here, have been getting PRANK CALLS & after i entered a plea for people 2 drink responsibly (we lost a family friend 2 drunk driver in a horrible accident), we have gotten invites…2 drink & after declining, some1 left an empty alchoholic beverage container outside of our front door.
i am not amused & do not appreci8 it.
because we opt not 2 drink, people whom do presume we r thinking them alchoholics, or that we have some issue that way- no to both-
& if any1 responsible 4 doing this is lurking here, please knock it off. ive already been stalked & harrassed & do not find this funny in the least.

& any guesses on what became of my records/ care following this? I would tell u, but my plans 2 exit require attention & do not dare detract from such a lively debate, further. merry merry. bet that therapist has lots of boxes of crap with pretty paper on it today & is surrounded by mirth. how nice for him. I still have nightmares about having pet-sat someones pet reptile (it ate something live for food)…i wonder what that therapist has nightmares about? O well he probably goes for therapy @ a TRUSTED persons office…2 bad i haven’t that option…

what is this freethinking u mention? would that b how any1 not attending an organized house of worship is labeled? i ran out of labels for my labels today, but all the stores r closed 4 some reason so have 2 go without…

Hmmm. Creationism is a christian value? Someone needs to inform all those “sophisticated” people of faith who seem to have missed the memo.
The study you mention is completely meaningless. It does not take into consideration all the ideologies that foster hatred such as many antisemitic verses in the Koran, the preachers who preach them and congregations who follow them. No one ever claimed that belief in a god per se leads to violence so your claim is a straw man argument.
Look at tge terrorist attacks in Nigeria for example. Scores of people died over differences about who god is and what he wants you to do. The attackers and their victims were ethnically the same. There was nothing setting them apart other than religion. Not just that, the attackers named setting up a sharia system in Nigeria as their motive. Certain brands of religion do lead to hatred and violence if belief in a god in itself doesn’t. But in our political correctness we call all this violence if “sectarian”, never “religious”. It is the untold rule that phrases cannot be used that give the impression that religion motivates people to do bad things. That is what we are challenging.
As for your claim that you are a deist, I think you are lying. Even many christians shy away from anti-science organizations like Discovery Institute and frauds like Luskin. You are a fundamentalist christian.

Regarding creationism: every religion has its creation mythology. It is certainly not the sole province of christianity. The major issue is that some christians are desperately trying to combine science and mythology. It can’t be done and it doesn’t work.

let me rephrase your question: “How much respect and courtesy do you have for tamil tigers who died for Nationalism?”; “How much respect and courtesy do you have for Marxists who died for Scientific Socialism?”

Don’t give me that BS nonsense that these ideologies have nothing to do with atheism. As far as i’m concerned the former is a secular cause, the latter has in its bedrock, historical materialism that assumes God is dead or is a projection of control or opium for the masses, which is exactly the same line used by skeptics today of religion.

They have nothing to do with atheism. The former is a civilian, territorial cause for alternative government, and the latter is an idea-lol-ogy which is connected to a way of life and again, a form of governing people. Neither have anything to do with belief in deities or lack thereof.

When people die for religious reasons, it’s purely selfish. Failed Jihadist suicide bombers talk about their desire for paradise. Apparently it’s strong enought that they don’t care about the innocents (babies, other Muslims, etc.) who have no choice in the matter. If someone dies for their earthly cause, like nationalism, it’s purpose is to benefit others. How did a Christian minister benefit other Christians by being killed?

I’ll more than half-agree with sytlusmobilus. The Tamils are not atheists. And while the Marxists probably are, anti-religious fevor is not what’s driving them.

Alvin? I don’t know what you have been smoking, but Tamil Tigers were Hindus not atheists.
As for those who died for Marxism-in case you forgot, they had their own god figures complete with miracles (birth of kim jong il was supposedly associated with a number of supranatural events ). Not to mention that they had ideologies based on no empirical evidence at all, like “the dictatorship of proletariat”. Your post is a lie.

Not me…on the remark opium for masses… I have said gluten behaves this way once in the bloodstream…effectively like an opiate for people intolerant to it especially & it is in just about everything packaged. opiates for pain management another story. if u look @ foods in their natural state unadulterated, not tinkered with (non grain foods mainly, not so much an issue. we r our environment & our environment is us. just about all that passes thru our bloodstream affects our brain & our brain is our filter & processor, our perception, our interaction with the universe…so all questions DO start there, that has been a point i was attempting 2 make. NO concept of god agreement or non agreement exists without a questioner.

to follow up
There’s the passage by Tacitus that mentions a certain ‘Christus’ instigating a revolt and was executed by Procurator/Proconsul Pontius Pilate. What you demand of contemporary evidence as criteria is impossible to satisfy, because Jesus wasn’t exactly a popular big-shot guy and civilization at that time don’t have mass-media. Unlike Gandhi which is more into the modern era of the 30’s and the 40’s. Besides, if you can say that Tacitus was simply repeating information from secondary sources, doesn’t discount that the passage is genuinely Tacitean and not a christian scribal forgery. see more here http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/tacitus.html

Well, unless Tacitus has also happened to mention how this “christus” casually walked about, a day or so *after* his execution, I hardly think he’s related to a certain overrated character from a Judaic fable anthology. Considering the world “christ” is actually a title meaning “savior” , and the occupied Jews’ penchant for messiahs, that could mean anyone from John the Baptist, to his great grandmother’s goat. Not quite the uncontestable proof, I’d say.

There is another thing that Peachgrinder Philosophicus J. Klutz neglected to mention. We have indelible proof of Lincoln’s existence. On the other hand, Jesus’ existence is still somewhat scratchy and only indicted in the worlds’ biggest selling fantasy novel.

Alvin fails to mention that the passage by Tacitus is in such dispute that even Christian scholars can’t agree on it, take R. T. France as an example who states:”the Tacitus passage is at best just Tacitus repeating what he had heard through Christians”. Seems “we” don’t have to say “Tacitus was simply repeating information from secondary sources”, a well respected Christian scholar has already done that for us.

As for your closing argument, I don’t see any contention over the existence of Lincoln, quite the opposite in fact…. I wonder what that means.

The whole idea that the “Annals” was written by Tacitus is also in dispute. Those who have some time on their hands may care to read this http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext05/7tcbr10.txt Of course, I am aware that the same charge has been laid about other famous authors (eg. Shakespeare) but to the best of my knowledge no copy of the “Annals” exists from the time of Tacitus or indeed at any time up until the early middle ages: plenty of time to add bits and pieces or to even forge a complete text. The claim that the passage about “Christus” had to have been written by him based of its contemptuous tone has no validity. Any clever forger would have realised that a reverential text would start alarm bells ringing.
Even in modern times there have been forgeries passed by experts, only to be disproven later on due to unbiased examination and scrutiny. I would cite for example the Turin Shroud, the Hitler diaries and Eoanthropus Dawsonii (Piltdown Man).
Incidentally, contrary to what the creationists would have us believe, a great sigh of relief went up among many palaeontologists when Piltdown Man was proven to be a forgery. It was an anathema in the modern sense of the word.

Keith, don’t go off on a tangent, jeez, we’re talking about Tacitus here
And it is precisely the contempous tone that marks it as genuine, since as a well-connected Roman would be egocentric enough to view eastern religions like Judaism and Christianity as barbarous and strange cults. additionally, liturgical language is missing in the passage, key words like Messiah, Savior or Holy. ‘Christus’ was condemned as an instigator in Judea of a cult that broke out marked as superstitious. It’s the same flavor as that of Lucian of Samosata’s satire against christians. He also noted how ‘strange’ it was for christians to regard everything they own as common property. And it’s smacks of a neophytes understanding of Christianity.

Insightful Apesays:

December 26, 2011 at 5:37 PM

All of which, of course, doesn’t change the fact the he wrote over 70 years after the alleged event, over two generations given the life expectancy back then. And given that he does not give a source, the likeliest explanation is that he used christian sources for the events that date back to the time of jesus.

Keithsays:

December 26, 2011 at 10:00 PM

I was merely pointing out that just because something has the right “flavour” does not mean that it is the genuine article. I do not know if ANY works attributed to Tacitus have been found that date back to the time he lived. The oldest copy of “Annals” found was written in 850 AD and kept in the library of Lorenzo Medici. A considerable time elapsed between the original of around 120 AD (or whenever) and the 850 AD version. A version dating from the 14th century was supposedly found in the Vatican and I do not doubt there were others dotted around the world. How they compare in conent I cannot say. My point is that stylistically and contexturally there is nothing to go on. As I pointed out using other examples, experts have been convinced by fakes before. So how does pointing out the bleeding obvious constitute going off on a tangent?

The point “I” was making is, as ‘evidence’ your ‘proof’ is so questionable even Christians can’t accept it as true. Since there is not enough authenticity here to convince those who already believe in the existence of Jesus, all that really remains are opinions. Last I checked an opinion is not proof, if it was I would still be Christian.

I think you need to find better evidence or at least something accepted by all Christian Scholars, after all, how do you hope to convince an atheist if the ‘evidence’ can’t even find universal acceptance in Christian circles?

nun sequitursays:

December 28, 2011 at 1:02 AM

Alvin, did u review the film reccomendation i made, incendies link on other thread…the synopsis does not do it enough justice, in my opinion.

theFewtheProudtheMarinarasays:

December 26, 2011 at 6:40 AM

Personally, I believe there was a self-styled prophet named Yeshua or Joshua or something else we now call “Jesus”. One of dozens at the time. And much later his life was completely blown out of proportion. Citing one passage by a historian, even a respected one, written more than a century later, is certainly no proof the man definitely existed. And certainly not that he was anything other than a man – something the early Christian church argued about for more than 300 years.

i was just reminded, here, that back in jesus’s day, people were supposed to have been crucified for far less than blasphemy, etc but for things like, stealing a loaf of bread…if this is accurate do not know, but the point was raised…

Tacitus was second century. He could not have seen the alleged events himself and he gives no sources for what he wrote. The easiest explanation is that he got it from whatever christian material. If some 20thof century author said Joseph Smith was a prophet would you believe him?

sorry, but judging by Stalinist persecution of Orthodox clergy and the demolition of a church in the USSR, they were clearly targeting religious folk. But to blame an extremist faction of an ideology and then ignore the moderated versions or benign factions is a fallacy of overgeneralization on your part. Its like lets mock all accountants because Enron happened.

Sure I can pretty much detect self-righteous egoism on your part that the priests, nuns and monks deserved to die because they were corrupt and pharisaical, but it doesn’t excuse the violence unleashed by the marxists and the fascists and some of them atheists against the religious. In fact, this attitude of lets make fun of xtians for their beliefs is nothing more than the non-believer’s version of lets totally destroy the self-esteem that they have by saying that that atheists become compost or even better they roast in hell.

Seriously Ape chillax you godless puritan you

And besides, its always a reflex action on the part of the godless to equate selfless christians overseas, that build hospitals, churches, build water wells, improve sanitation conditions and literacy in developing countries with an extremist faction in Islam. Seriously people, stop squawking like Parrots, but i guess you guys can’t help since you have noodles for brains. And Marinara, i’m assuming you believe in evolution please take a page out of your randomly generated friend nun-sequitur, because that’s exactly what your argument is. I would respect you more if you spew out randomly generated trash from time to time.

What kind of a nonsense is that? Stalin also murdered plenty of other communists. If the fact that he killed priests means atheism is the reason for his crimes what do you make of the fact the he killed evolutionary biologist Nikolai Vavilov? It hostility to evolution (all too common among christians) also to be blamed for what Stalin did?
You know who Stalin’s favorite historical character was? A blood thirsty murderer and devout christian named Ivan the Terrible. Have you heard atheists going around blaming christianity for what ge did?
Now you bring up all the good deeds of christians as if no one else does any good deed in the world. You know, Hamas and Hezbollah do a lot of charity work too. The communist regime of Cuba perforns a lot of free medical procedures for the poor all over the world. But I say, damn all religious and communist charities because they are all in pursuit of an agenda. The charities that do not try to victimize the needy even more are secular ones like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, set up by atheists.

Incidentally if you have a problem with ridiculing religion go take it up wut Thomas Jefferson.
“Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus.”
PS Since you are clearly for christianity and against islam do you know admit thatwhen you said you were a deist, you lied?

Nun Seq – you are, at least in my book, entirely redeemed by your apt and pungent comment. Churchill could not have done better, although – forgive me – he would not have used your hypertelegraphic style. And your cover is blown: you CAN make a point in three lines. My sincere wish for you is for an outward-turned and happier year to come. I was going to say “2012”, but (speaking of prophets we know exist) it’s a far smaller year, EPBH. (Respects to Insightful, Marinara, Tilted, Stylus, Keith, Noodlit, Atsap, & Tiara, for words as well as tree.) R’Amen.

thanks 4 being so educational here…i had not realized he acknowledged the threat in advance? i always did like the brittys…

nun sequitursays:

December 27, 2011 at 2:55 PM

I’ll b darned, learned something, today….king george was allegedly / may have been dethroned for support of hitler’s ideologies? not churchill, he was a stand up guy, two consecutives , honorary citizen of usa & look @ that polka dot bowtie..

TiltedHorizonsays:

December 27, 2011 at 12:08 AM

I just LOL’d after reading your post, nun. I’ll now reread Alvin’s post using the high pitched chipmunk voice.

“Seriously people, stop squawking like Parrots, but i guess you guys can’t help since you have noodles for brains.”

I guess you ran out of ‘proof’ leaving only insults to fight with. Speaking of squawking like parrots, it would be better if you actually vetted your facts before parroting opinions. To suggest Stalin persecuted the religious is an attempt to create truth by omission. The reality is best exemplified by Stalin’s own quotes:

“Death solves all problems – no man, no problem.”
“Everyone imposes his own system as far as his army can reach.”
“The only real power comes out of a long rifle.”
“Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas”

Does this sound like a man who targets only the religious or a man who treats all humanity with equal disdain?

Actions speak louder than words. Stalin was a maniac who eliminated anyone he perceived as a threat. Priests and hard-core marxists, peasant and generals, were all equally at risk of getting killed. Even Lenin’s closest friends during exile years and his own allies against Trotsky, Zinoviev and Kamenev, were not spared.
But hay, as a murder who happened to be non-religious, he is the best a hateful troll like Alvin can hope for.
And he has the nerve to accuse others of “overgeneralizing “.